In its report on human rights in India during 2013, released in 2014, Human Rights Watch stated, "India took positive steps in strengthening laws protecting women and children, and, in several important cases, prosecuting state security forces for extrajudicial killings." The report also condemned the persistent impunity for abuse linked to insurgency in Maoist areas, Jammu and Kashmir, Manipur and Assam. The report also went on to state, "The fact that the government responded to public outrage confirms India’s claims of a vibrant civil society. An independent judiciary and free media also acted as checks on abusive practices. However, reluctance to hold public officials to account for abuses or dereliction of duty continued to foster a culture of corruption and impunity".[1]

On a global level, India has not lived up to expectations of promoting respect for democracy and human rights in its foreign policy as it opts for a policy of "non-interference in internal affairs of other countries". However India is engaged in promoting stability and human rights in Afghanistan, pledging nearly US$2 billion for the country’s rehabilitation and reconstruction efforts, supporting education of girls, providing some police training, and granting asylum to a number of activists fleeing Taliban threats.[1]

The Constitution of India establishes a sovereign democraticrepublic with universal adult franchise. Part 3 of the Constitution contains a Bill of Fundamental Rights enforceable by the Supreme Court and the High Courts. It also provides for reservations for previously disadvantaged sections in education, employment and political representation.

A constitutional amendment establishes Local Self-Government (Panchayati Raj) as a third tier of governance at the village level, with one-third of the seats reserved for women. Reservations were provided for scheduled castes and tribes as well.

1992

Babri Masjid demolished by Hindu mobs, resulting in riots across the country.

The Asian Centre for Human Rights estimated that from 2002 to 2008, over four people per day died while in police custody, with "hundreds" of those deaths being due to police use of torture.[9] According to a report written by the Institute of Correctional Administration in Punjab, up to 50% of police officers in the country have used physical or mental abuse on prisoners.[10] Instances of torture, such as through a lack of sanitation, space, or water have been documented in West Bengal as well. [11]

A soldier guards the roadside checkpoint outside Srinagar International Airport in January 2009.

Several international agencies and the UN have reported human rights violations in Indian-administered Kashmir. In a press release the OHCHR spokesmen stated "The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights is concerned about the recent violent protests in Indian-administered Kashmir that have reportedly led to civilian casualties as well as restrictions to the right to freedom of assembly and expression.".[12] A 1996 Human Rights Watch report accuses the Indian military and Indian-government backed paramilitaries of "committ[ing] serious and widespread human rights violations in Kashmir."[13] One such alleged massacre occurred on 6 January 1993 in the town of Sopore. TIME Magazine described the incident as such: "In retaliation for the killing of one soldier, paramilitary forces rampaged through Sopore's market setting buildings ablaze and shooting bystanders. The Indian government pronounced the event 'unfortunate' and claimed that an ammunition dump had been hit by gunfire, setting off fires that killed most of the victims."[14] In addition to this, there have been claims of disappearances by the police or the army in Kashmir by several human rights organisations.[15][16]

Many human rights organisations such as Amnesty International and the Human Rights Watch (HRW) have condemned human rights abuses in Kashmir by Indians such as "extra-judicial executions", "disappearances", and torture;[17] the "Armed Forces Special Powers Act", which "provides impunity for human rights abuses and fuels cycles of violence. The Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) grants the military wide powers of arrest, the right to shoot to kill, and to occupy or destroy property in counterinsurgency operations. Indian officials claim that troops need such powers because the army is only deployed when national security is at serious risk from armed combatants. Such circumstances, they say, call for extraordinary measures." Human rights organisations have also asked Indian government to repeal[2] the Public Safety Act, since "a detainee may be held in administrative detention for a maximum of two years without a court order.".[18] One 2008 report determined that Indian Administered Kashmir, was 'partly Free',[19]

According to the estimates of Reporters Without Borders, India ranks 122nd worldwide in 2010 on the press freedom index (down from 105th in 2009). The press freedom index for India is 38.75 in 2010 (29.33 for 2009) on a scale that runs from 0 (most free) to 105 (least free).[20][21] In 2014 India was down ranked to 140th worldwide (score of 40.34 out of 105) but despite this remains one of the best scores in the region.[22]

The Indian Constitution, while not mentioning the word "press", provides for "the right to freedom of speech and expression" (Article 19(1) a). However this right is subject to restrictions under subclause (2), whereby this freedom can be restricted for reasons of "sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, preserving decency, preserving morality, in relation to contempt of court, defamation, or incitement to an offence". Laws such as the Official Secrets Act and Prevention of Terrorism Act[23] (POTA) have been used to limit press freedom. Under POTA, person could be detained for up to six months before the police were required to bring charges on allegations for terrorism-related offenses. POTA was repealed in 2004, but was replaced by amendments to UAPA.[24] The Official Secrets Act 1923 is abolished after right to information act 2005

For the first half-century of independence, media control by the state was the major constraint on press freedom. Indira Gandhi famously stated in 1975 that All India Radio is "a Government organ, it is going to remain a Government organ..." [25] With the liberalisation starting in the 1990s, private control of media has burgeoned, leading to increasing independence and greater scrutiny of government. Organisations like Tehelka and NDTV have been particularly influential, e.g. in bringing about the resignation of powerful Haryana minister Venod Sharma. In addition, laws like Prasar Bharati act passed in recent years contribute significantly to reducing the control of the press by the government.

Until the Delhi High Court decriminalised consensual private sexual acts between consenting adults on 2 July 2009,[8] homosexuality was considered criminal as per interpretations of the ambiguous Section 377 of the 150-year-old Indian Penal Code (IPC), a law passed by the colonial British authorities. However, this law was very rarely enforced.[26] In its ruling decriminalising homosexuality, the Delhi High Court noted that existed law conflicted with the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution of India, and such criminalising is violative of Articles 21, 14 and 15 of the Constitution.[27]

On 11 December 2013, homosexuality was again criminalized by a Supreme Court ruling.[28]

Human trafficking is a $8 million illegal business in India. Around 10,000 Nepali women are brought to India annually for commercial sexual exploitation.[29] Each year 20,000–25,000 women and children are trafficked from Bangladesh.[30]

Babubhai Khimabhai Katara was a Member of Parliament, in 2007, when arrested at the Indira Gandhi International Airport in Delhi, India for trying smuggle a mother and her teen son to Canada, on his diplomatic passport. The Mother and her son were hoping to join her husband who was living as an illegal migrant in Canada, and had paid Babubhai Khimabhai Katara about $70,000 USD. The woman had previously been repeatedly denied a visa by the Canadian government. The fact that even some members of parliament with diplomatic privileges can be approached for such purposes is seen as opening a Pandora's box on corruption in the Indian political system (See also Operation Duryodhana). He was suspended from his party and stripped of his seat in the parliament for this offense.

Communal conflicts between religious groups (mostly between Hindus and Muslims) have been prevalent in India since around the time of its independence from British Rule. Among the oldest incidences of communal violence in India was the Moplah rebellion, when Militant Islamists massacred Hindus in Kerala. Communal riots took place during the partition of India between Hindus/Sikhs and Muslims where large numbers of people were killed in large-scale violence.

According to a report by Human Rights Watch, "Dalits and indigenous peoples (known as Scheduled Tribes or adivasis) continue to face discrimination, exclusion, and acts of communal violence. Laws and policies adopted by the Indian government provide a strong basis for protection, but are not being faithfully implemented by local authorities."[34]

The UN stated in 2011 that the caste system of India will be declared a human rights abuse. The UN's Human Rights Council, meeting in Geneva, is expected to ratify draft principles which recognises the scale of persecution suffered by 65 million 'untouchables' or 'Dalits' who carry out the most menial and degrading work.[35]

Amnesty International says "it is the responsibility of the Indian government to fully enact and apply its legal provisions against discrimination on the basis of caste and descent.[36]

Conflicts such as Anti-Bihari sentiment have sometimes escalated to violence between communal groups, despite government and police efforts to mediate the situation.

Invasive methods like 'narcoanalysis' (controlled anaesthesia), Brain mapping, and lie detector tests were once commonly permitted by Indian courts for crime investigation. Even though according to Indian constitution "nobody may be made a witness against himself".

Concerns regarding human rights violations in conducting deception detection tests (DDT)s were raised long back and the National Human Rights Commission of India had published Guidelines in 2000 for the Administration of Polygraph tests. However, only few of the investigating agencies were seen to follow these guidelines.[40]

However on May 5, 2010 the Supreme Court in India (Smt. Selvi vs. State of Karnataka) declared brain mapping, lie detector tests and narcoanalysis to be unconstitutional, violating Article 20 (3) of Fundamental Rights. These techniques cannot be conducted forcefully on any individual and requires consent for the same. When they are conducted with consent, the material so obtained is regarded as evidence during trial of cases according to Section 27 of the Evidence Act.[40]

Inadequate investigation and hasty rulings by courts have caused some wrongful convictions of innocent people causing them to languish in jail for many years. For instance, the Bombay high court in September 2009 asked the Maharashtra government to pay 100,000 as compensation to a 40-year-old man who languished in prison for over 10 years for a crime he didn't commit.